Silicon photonic chips have the potential to realize complex integrated quantum systems. Presented here is a method for preparing and testing a silicon photonic chip for quantum measurements.
Silicon photonic chips have the potential to realize complex integrated quantum information processing circuits, including photon sources, qubit manipulation, and integrated single-photon detectors. Here, we present the key aspects of preparing and testing a silicon photonic quantum chip with an integrated photon source and two-photon interferometer. The most important aspect of an integrated quantum circuit is minimizing loss so that all of the generated photons are detected with the highest possible fidelity. Here, we describe how to perform low-loss edge coupling by using an ultra-high numerical aperture fiber to closely match the mode of the silicon waveguides. By using an optimized fusion splicing recipe, the UHNA fiber is seamlessly interfaced with a standard single-mode fiber. This low-loss coupling allows the measurement of high-fidelity photon production in an integrated silicon ring resonator and the subsequent two-photon interference of the produced photons in a closely integrated Mach-Zehnder interferometer. This paper describes the essential procedures for the preparation and characterization of high-performance and scalable silicon quantum photonic circuits.
Silicon is showing great promise as a photonics platform for quantum information processing1,2,3,4,5. One of the vital components of quantum photonic circuits is the photon source. Photon-pair sources have been developed from silicon in the form of micro-ring resonators made via a third-order nonlinear process, spontaneous four-wave mixing (SFWM)6,7,8. These sources are capable of producing pairs of indistinguishable photons, which are ideal for experiments involving photon entanglement9.
It is important to note that ring resonator sources can operate with both clockwise and counter-clockwise propagation, and the two different propagation directions are generally independent from one another. This allows a single ring to function as two sources. When optically pumped from both directions, these sources generate the following entangled state:
where and are the independent creation operators for clockwise- and counterclockwise-propagating bi-photons, respectively. This is a very desirable form of entangled state known as a N00N state (N=2)10.
Passing this state through an on-chip Mach-Zehnder interferometer (MZI) results in the state:
This state oscillates between maximum coincidence and zero coincidence at twice the frequency of classical interference in an MZI, effectively doubling the sensitivity of the interferometer10. Here, we present the procedure used to test such an integrated photon source and MZI device.
NOTE: This protocol assumes that the photonic chip has already been fabricated. The chip described here (shown in Figure 1A) was fabricated at the Cornell University NanoScale Science & Technology Facility using standard processing techniques for silicon photonic devices11. These include the use of silicon-on-insulator wafers (composed of a 220 nm-thick silicon layer, a 3-µm layer of silicon dioxide, and a 525 µm-thick silicon substrate), electron-beam lithography to define the strip waveguides (500 nm-wide), and the plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition of the silicon dioxide cladding (~3 µm-thick). The micro-ring resonators were designed with an inner radius of 18.5 µm and a waveguide-to-ring gap of 150 nm. Figures of merit for this device include loss, quality factor, free spectral range, and dispersion.
1. Photonic Chip Preparation
2. Preparation of Fiber Pigtails
3. Configuration of the Testing Setup
NOTE: A diagram of the testing setup is shown in Figure 1B. The mount for the chip is a copper pedestal that is in contact with a thermo-electric cooler (TEC). There is a microscope fitted with both visible and infrared (IR) cameras for viewing the photonic chip.
4. Measuring Two-photon Interference
Individual photon counts from each detector, as well as the coincidence counts, were collected as the relative phase between the two paths was tuned. The individual counts (Figure 5A) show the classical interference pattern from an MZI with visibilities of 94.5 ± 1.6% and 94.9 ± 0.9%. The coincidence measurements (Figure 5B) show the quantum interference of the entangled state, as is evident by the oscillation at twice the frequency of the classical interference pattern, with a visibility of 93.3 ± 2.0% (96.0 ± 2.1% with the accidentals subtracted). To confirm that the photons are primarily being generated in the ring, the pumps were configured into two resonances that would require the bi-photons to be generated at a wavelength not supported by the ring. The orange line in Figure 5B confirms that, with such a configuration, there are no significant coincidences. Figure 6 shows the coincidence counts for the available resonance pairs that are symmetric in frequency about the resonance corresponding to the desired bi-photons. In all cases, the 2θ dependence of the relative phase is evident.
Figure 1: Experimental Testbed for the Silicon Waveguide Circuit. (a) Image of the silicon photonic quantum chip indicating the propagation direction of the photons. The inset is an energy conservation diagram for the four-wave mixing process that occurs within the ring. (b) Experimental setup used to test the silicon photonic circuit. (c) Transmission spectrum of the micro-ring cavity, with arrows indicating the pumping configuration as well as the wavelength of the generated bi-photons. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 2: Facet Improvement from Polishing. Images of the facet of a silicon photonic chip (a) after fabrication but before polishing and (b) after polishing. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 3: Characterization of Waveguide Dispersion. Plot of the wavelength dependence of the group index. The red-shaded region is representative of the bandwidth of the resonances and allows for the easy evaluation of the phase-matching condition. The green dashed line is horizontal and lies completely within the shaded region, demonstrating that the phase-matching condition is satisfied. The fact that the data is flat across the entire range is confirmation of zero dispersion. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 4: Measurement of Coincident Photons. Plot of the coincidence peak measured with the time-correlator with an integration time of 90 s and a timing resolution of 32 ps. The red dashed lines indicate the edges of the coincidence window, in which there are a total of 459 coincidences. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 5: Classical and Quantum Interference Measurements. (a) Classical light demonstrating the typical interference pattern from an MZI as the relative phase between the two paths is varied. (b) Coincidence correlation measurements showing the 2θ dependence of the relative phase. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Figure 6: Bi-Photon Visibility for Various Pump Wavelength Configurations. Plots of the coincidences correlation measurements and calculated visibilities for the pumping wavelengths of (a) 1,513.5 nm and 1,592.0 nm, (b) 1,518.2 nm and 1,586.9 nm, (c) 1,522.9 nm and 1,581.8 nm, (d) 1,527.7 nm and 1,576.7 nm, (e) 1,532.4 nm and 1,571.6 nm, and (f) 1,537.2 nm and 1,566.6 nm. In all cases, the 2θ dependence of the relative phase is evident. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
SMF to UHNA Fiber Splicing Parameters | |
Align: Core | Focus: Auto |
ECF: Off | Auto Power: Off |
Cleave Limit: 1° | Core Angle Limit: 1° |
Cleaning Arc: 150 ms | Gap: 15 µm |
Gapset Position: Center | Prefuse Power: 20 bit |
Prefuse Time: 180 ms | Overlap: 10 µm |
Arc1 Power: 20 bit | Arc1 Time: 18,000 ms |
Arc2: Off | Rearc Time: 800 ms |
Taper Splice: Off |
Table 1: Settings for Fusion Splicing SMF to UHNA Fiber.
There are multiple challenges for the field of integrated photonics to overcome in order for complex and scalable systems of photonic devices to be feasible. These include, but are not limited to: tight fabrication tolerances, isolation from environmental instabilities, and minimization of all forms of loss. There are critical steps in the above protocol that help to minimize the loss of photonic devices.
One of the most crucial requirements in minimizing loss is closely matching the optical modes of the fibers and the waveguides. Part of the difficulty stems from the large mode field diameter (MFD) of SMF (~10 µm). On the integrated device side, there is a 500 nm-wide silicon waveguide with a much smaller MFD (<1 µm). This mode transition between the fiber and the waveguide can be improved in two ways: the SMF to a length of UHNA fiber or placing an inverse taper to the edge of the photonic chip. The spliced region between the SMF and UHNA fiber acts as a mode converter, reducing the size of the mode to ~3 µm. The inverse taper is used to expand the mode on the chip by reducing the width of the waveguide as it approaches the facet. This chip uses a linear taper from the 500 nm waveguides to the 150 nm tips (at the chip facets), with a transition length of 300 µm. The tapering of the waveguide width to the edge of the chip results in a decrease in the effective index of the optical mode and, in turn, the mode expands.
The polishing of the chip facet is also very important in mitigating optical loss. Two concerns while polishing are stopping at the desired surface and delaminating the upper cladding material. Ideally, the final position of the facet would be precisely at the end of the taper. However, this is quite difficult to achieve, and for that reason, the tip of the taper is extended by 100 µm so that the polishing can be stopped a few microns before the taper starts. If too little material is removed, the mode will not be captured as efficiently by the taper. If too much material is removed, there will be a larger mode mismatch at the fiber/chip interface, and more of the light will be lost. The other main concern is the delamination of the upper cladding. If there are problems with fabrication (cleanliness or excessive stress in the cladding), the cladding may not adhere to the substrate at the edge of the chip. When delamination happens to occur at one of the waveguides, it will result in very poor coupling efficiencies. If it is noticed during polishing, a polishing lubricant other than water can often improve results.
There is room for improvement in the above protocol. The largest improvement would come from using a more standard method for thermally tuning the device. The method used here was a result of a simplified fabrication process that did not include any metal layers. Typically, a resistive metal layer is used for heater elements, and a highly-conductive metal layer is used for contact pads and wires from the pads to the heater elements. A stage can then be used to set down probes onto the pads, allowing a voltage to be applied to the heaters. This enables a greater level of control and stability. A silicon photonic chip similar to what was tested here but with metal heaters is shown in the accompanying video.
There are other methods of coupling light to the photonic chip. For this work, edge coupling was used. Other common methods include free space coupling and grating coupling. Free space coupling relies upon bulk optical elements to align and focus the beam into the waveguide at the edge of the chip. The drawback with coupling in this manner is that it can be very difficult to optimize the alignment of the beam, and there will always be a reflection at the interface due to the index difference. Grating couplers scatter the light from the waveguide vertically, so that the end of a fiber can be placed at the surface of the cladding to couple to the device. These also have some issues, including difficult alignment (the fiber is often in the line of sight of the microscope) and higher losses. Fiber edge coupling is not perfect either. Pressing the fibers against the chip can damage the ends of the fibers, and both the fibers and the chip edge need to be cleaned frequently. The benefit of fiber edge coupling is that the alignment is far easier than the other two methods and is capable of achieving lower losses.
As the complexity of optical systems increases, the only feasible way for them to scale into a stable platform is in an integrated system, much like the path of electronic technology. The challenge is merging the integrated photonics platform with the bulk and fiber-based optical systems that are already deployed. With the utilization of photon-based quantum information systems, where the information space scales exponentially (compared to the linear scaling of classical systems), phase stability and low-loss integrated photonic technologies are paramount for success. The protocol we have described serves as an initial path forward for advancing this emerging technology.
The authors have nothing to disclose.
This work was performed in part at the Cornell University NanoScale Science and Technology Facility, a member of the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network, which is supported by the National Science Foundation (Grant ECCS-1542081). We acknowledge support for this work from the Air Force Research Lab (AFRL). This material is based upon work partially supported by the National Science Foundation under Award No. ECCS14052481.
3-Axis NanoMax Flexure Stage | Thorlabs | MAX312D | Precision 3-axis stages |
Three Channel Piezo Controller | Thorlabs | MDT693B | Piezo controllers for NanoMax stages |
Fiber Polarization Controller | Thorlabs | FPC562 | 3-Paddle fiber-based polarization controller |
Fiber Cleaver | Thorlabs | XL411 | Fiber cleaver |
Standard V-Groove Fiber Holder | Thorlabs | HFV001 | standard v-groove mount |
Tapered V-Groove Fiber Holder | Thorlabs | HFV002 | tapered v-groove mount |
Right-Angle Top Plate for NanoMax Stage | Thorlabs | AMA011 | right-angle bracket |
50:50 Fiber Optic Coupler | Thorlabs | TW1550R5F1 | 50/50 combiner |
Optical Fiber Fusion Splicer | Fujikura | FSM-40S | Fusion splicer |
MultiPrep Polishing System – 8" | Allied High Tech | 15-2100 | Chip polisher |
Cross-Sectioning Paddle with Reference Edge | Allied High Tech | 15-1010-RE | Polishing mount |
Lightwave Measurement System | Keysight | 8164B | Mainframe for tunable laser |
Tunable Laser Source | Keysight | 81606A | Tunable laser |
Optical Power Sensor | Keysight | 81634B | Power meter |
NIR Single Photon Detector | ID Quantique | ID210 | Single photon detectors |
NIR Single Photon Detector | ID Quantique | ID230 | Low noise, free-running single photon detectors |
PicoHarp | PicoQuant | PicoHarp 300 | Time-correlated single photon counting |
WiDy SWIR InGaAs Camera | NIT | 640U-S | IR Camera |
WDM Bandpass Filter | JDS Uniphase | 30055053-368-2.2 | pump cleanup filters |
WDM Bandpass Filter | JDS Uniphase | 1011787-012 | pump rejection filters |
Ultra-High Numerical Aperture Fiber | Nufern | UHNA-7 | high index fiber |
Ultra Optical Single Mode Fiber | Corning | SMF-28 | standard single mode fiber |