Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 84 references

Cavity-Quantum Electrodynamics with Moir\'e Flatband Photonic Crystals

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A moiré flatband photonic crystal cavity tunes a single quantum dot's radiative lifetime by a factor of 40, from 42 ps to 1692 ps.

desk verdict A credible first demonstration of single-QD cavity QED in a moiré flatband photonic crystal, but the headline 40-fold lifetime tuning is not secured because the reference lifetime is an ensemble bulk measurement that the paper's own supplement admits is contaminated by carrier relaxation. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16830 v2 pith:EHTTL47C submitted 2024-11-25 physics.optics cond-mat.mes-hallquant-ph

Yu-Tong Wang , Qi-Hang Ye , Jun-Yong Yan , Yufei Qiao , Chen Chen , Xiao-Tian Cheng , Chen-Hui Li , Zi-Jian Zhang
show 13 more authors
Cheng-Nian Huang Yun Meng Kai Zou Wen-Kang Zhan Chao Zhao Xiaolong Hu Clarence Augustine T H Tee Wei E. I. Sha Zhixiang Huang Huiyun Liu Chao-Yuan Jin Lei Ying Feng Liu
This is my paper · ORCID
classification physics.opticscond-mat.mes-hallquant-ph PACS 42.50.Pq42.70.Qs78.67.Hc
keywords moiréphotoniccrystalflatbandcavityPurcelleffectquantumelectrodynamicsdotspontaneousemissioncontrolsiliconphotonicsintegrationdensityofstates
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

The paper argues that a moiré photonic crystal with an isolated flatband can act as a cavity in which strong spontaneous-emission enhancement and large emitter-position tolerance are obtained together, rather than as a trade-off. The mechanism is a nearly infinite photonic density of states at a fixed frequency, so many wavevectors contribute to the local density of states seen by a quantum emitter. The authors support this with a fabricated triple-layer moiré GaAs membrane on silicon containing an InGaAs quantum dot, whose radiative lifetime they tune by a factor of 40, from $42\pm1$ ps on resonance to $1692\pm7$ ps far off resonance, while showing that the cavity sets the dot's emission polarization. A sympathetic reader would care because this removes the nanometre-precision placement requirement that limits conventional cavities and points toward scalable on-chip single-photon sources.

What carries the argument

The central object is the moiré flatband cavity, a quasi-1D triple-layer photonic crystal whose hole lattices have periods $a_1=209.1$ nm and $a_2=194.1$ nm at a magic separation $s=95$ nm, satisfying $L=13a_1=14a_2$. The flatband produces a nearly divergent photonic density of states at a fixed frequency, and the local density of states $\rho(\omega_0,x)$ enters the emitter's spontaneous emission rate; the paper quantifies emitter-placement tolerance by the kurtosis-based uniformity $\bar K_\rho = 3 - \operatorname{Kurt}\, \rho(\omega_0,x)$. A Green's-function derivation connects the flatband sum over modes to the Purcell factor, showing that the many nearly degenerate $k$-states add constructively without requiring a small mode volume.

What would settle it

Measure the same quantum dot's lifetime at many positions inside one moiré unit cell: the flatband claim predicts a plateau of high Purcell factor across most of the cell, whereas a defect-cavity explanation would show a sharp spatial peak; a single-Lorentzian fit to lifetime versus detuning with the independently measured 0.394 meV cavity linewidth is the quantitative version of this test.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the flatband of a quasi-1D moiré photonic crystal—formed by hole lattices with periods $a_1=209.1$ nm and $a_2=194.1$ nm arranged so $L=13a_1=14a_2$ at a magic separation—sustains a nearly divergent photon density of states, which localizes light while keeping the local density of states high across a large area. In a defect photonic-crystal cavity high Purcell factor comes at the cost of small mode volume and extreme positioning precision; the paper reports that the moiré cavity breaks this trade-off, achieving a maximum local density of states nearly two orders of magnitude above an L20 defect cavity at the same uniformity. Experimentally, a single InGaAs quantum dot embedded in the suspended GaAs membrane couples to the moiré cavity mode at about 1.394 eV: on resonance at $B=7$ T its radiative lifetime is $42\pm1$ ps, a 27-fold shortening relative to the $1121\pm3$ ps ensemble bulk lifetime, and at $B=0$ T, far off resonance, the lifetime lengthens to $1692\pm7$ ps, giving a 40-fold tuning range attributed to Purcell enhancement and inhibition. The cavity also dictates the dot's emission polarization, which becomes linear along the cavity axis, matching the cavity mode polarization at $B=6$ T.

Load-bearing premise

The quantitative Purcell factors rest on the assumption that the unmodified radiative lifetime of the single quantum dot equals the 1121±3 ps ensemble bulk lifetime measured under above-barrier excitation, and that the zero-field exciton has the same intrinsic oscillator strength as the Zeeman-shifted branch at 7 T.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the flatband-DOS picture is right, moiré cavities can be arrays of nearly identical single-photon sources: five unit cells on one chip already show Q factors from 2602 to 5026 with only small mode-frequency variation.
  • Emitter placement becomes forgiving: the same cavity sustains strong Purcell enhancement over a spatial region much larger than in defect cavities, so deterministic coupling no longer requires nanometre positioning.
  • Because the flatband sits inside a photonic bandgap rather than in the continuum, emitters with finite linewidth couple into it without leaking into radiative continuum modes, avoiding the main limitation of BIC-based Purcell enhancement.
  • The III-V-on-silicon growth means these cavities are compatible with silicon photonic circuits; shifting the QD emission to telecom wavelengths by composition, strain, or size control would extend the result to the silicon photonic platform.
  • With improved fabrication, the estimated coupling strength of about 24 GHz approaches the strong-coupling regime, which would enable quantum gates, single-photon switches, and quantum nodes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A test not reported in the paper: mapping the lifetime, not just the continuous-wave photoluminescence, of one dot as a function of position within a single unit cell would directly separate spatial tolerance from spectral detuning and would check whether the flatband plateau survives the actual fabricated disorder.
  • If the 40-fold tuning is genuine, the same dot should show a corresponding change in single-photon indistinguishability, since Purcell enhancement suppresses dephasing; a Hong-Ou-Mandel measurement on and off resonance would be a natural follow-up.
  • The qualitative comparison with BIC suggests a quantitative prediction the authors do not make: the Purcell factor should stay high for emitter detunings of several cavity linewidths because the bandgap blocks leakage, unlike a BIC cavity where off-resonant coupling leaks into the continuum.
  • The robustness simulations imply a practical improvement path: the Q factor is limited mainly by hole-diameter disorder, so reducing diameter error to about 4% should raise Q substantially and may push the system toward strong coupling.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes and demonstrates cavity-QED using a quasi-1D moiré photonic-crystal flatband cavity. Theoretically, the authors argue that an isolated flatband gives a near-divergent photonic density of states, allowing a high Purcell factor and large spatial tolerance simultaneously, in contrast to defect cavities where these two properties trade off. They fabricate a suspended GaAs membrane containing InGaAs quantum dots on a silicon substrate, observe flatband-like DOS and localized modes with measured Q factors up to about 5000, and identify a single QD coupled to the moiré cavity. The key experimental claims are: cavity-dictated linear polarization of the QD emission at high magnetic field, and a radiative lifetime tunable from 42 ps to 1692 ps, which they attribute to strong Purcell enhancement and Purcell inhibition. They report a 40-fold lifetime tuning range and a 27-fold Purcell enhancement relative to an ensemble bulk lifetime of 1121 ps.

Significance. If the quantitative claims are established, the work would be a notable demonstration of moiré-flatband cavity QED and a promising step toward arrays of quantum emitters with relaxed positioning requirements on a silicon-compatible platform. The theoretical LDOS/Purcell simulations are independent of the lifetime measurements and are a genuine strength, as is the polarization data, which provides independent evidence of real QD-cavity coupling. The direct measured lifetimes, 42±1 ps and 1692±7 ps, are clean single-exponential observables. However, the central quantitative interpretation—Purcell enhancement and inhibition—rests on an unvalidated reference lifetime, as detailed in the major comments. The significance is therefore conditional until that reference or an equivalent same-dot control is provided.

major comments (3)
  1. [Fig. 3D/E and Supplementary Section 5] The quantitative Purcell factors are referenced to an ensemble bulk lifetime T'_1 = 1121±3 ps measured under above-barrier excitation, yet the paper's own Supplementary Section 5 states that above-barrier excitation leads to long carrier relaxation times, typically hundreds of picoseconds, that obscure the true Purcell factor (refs. 81–84). That caveat applies equally to the reference itself: the 1121 ps ensemble value likely includes carrier capture/relaxation and has not been shown to equal the intrinsic radiative lifetime of QD A, which is measured under different excitation conditions (LA phonon-assisted). Without a same-dot intrinsic lifetime control—for example, the same QD in an unpatterned membrane, or with the cavity mode detuned far beyond the measured detuning range—the quoted 27-fold Purcell enhancement, the assignment of the 1692 ps decay to Purcell inhibition, and the F_p values in Fig. 3E are not quantitatively secured. The Lorentzian fit in Fig. 3E does not resolve this issue because F_p = T'_1/T1 is defined using the same T'_1; the fit only tests the lineshape of the raw lifetimes, not the validity of the reference.
  2. [Control of single photon emission, B=0 TRPL] The off-resonance decay at B=0 with T1 = 1692±7 ps is interpreted as Purcell inhibition relative to 1121 ps. However, the intrinsic lifetime of this particular QD at B=0 is not measured. If the natural lifetime of QD A is close to 1.7 ns, then the long decay is simply the unmodified lifetime and the inhibition claim collapses. A minimal experimental control would be to measure the same QD with the moiré cavity mode tuned well outside the relevant spectral range or in a region of the same membrane without the photonic crystal; such a measurement would distinguish inhibition from an intrinsic lifetime. As written, the direct ratio 1692/42≈40 between two measured decay times is meaningful, but calling both endpoints radiative and attributing the ratio to Purcell enhancement plus inhibition requires a valid reference.
  3. [Supplementary Section 5 (QD B)] The supplementary Purcell factor of approximately 8 for QD B is obtained under above-barrier excitation, the very condition the authors themselves identify as obscuring the true Purcell factor. The caveat is used to explain why a higher factor was not observed, but the same caveat means the quoted factor of 8 cannot independently corroborate the quantitative Purcell enhancement claim for QD A. This measurement should either be repeated with phonon-assisted or resonant excitation, or be presented only as a qualitative demonstration of lifetime reduction rather than as a quantitative Purcell factor.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (S17)] There is an unbalanced parenthesis in Eq. (S17): the expression 'Im[ˆµ·G(rs,r′s,ω)·ˆµ)' should read 'Im[ˆµ·G(rs,r′s,ω)·ˆµ]'.
  2. [Fig. 3E] The horizontal axis of Fig. 3E is labeled only as 'detuning'; please state explicitly whether this is the energy detuning between QD and cavity mode, the magnetic-field-tuned shift, or another variable, and report the number of data points and residuals for the Lorentzian fit.
  3. [Fig. 3C] The polarization data in Fig. 3C are taken at B=6 T, while the resonance condition is described at B=7 T in Fig. 3A; please clarify whether the polarization alignment with the cavity mode was also verified at the resonance field.
  4. [Fig. 2F] The Q factors for the five moiré cavity modes are listed without uncertainties; please specify the fitting procedure and the uncertainty estimates for these values.
  5. [Introduction and Fig. 1G] The use of an L20 defect cavity as an 'analogy to the traditional Fabry-Pérot cavity' in Fig. 1G is not self-evident; a brief explanation of why L20 approximates the Fabry-Pérot limit would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the flatband-LDOS theory, numerical Purcell maps, and direct lifetime measurements are mutually independent; the only flagged concern is a calibration caveat about the above-barrier ensemble reference, which is a limitation rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The load-bearing theoretical claim (flatband LDOS gives simultaneous high Purcell factor and positional tolerance) is derived from Eqs. (1)-(2) and the standard Green-function Purcell formula (Eq. S17), not assumed from the experimental lifetimes; the numerical Purcell/LDOS maps in Figs. S3-S5 and the measured cavity Q factors are independent inputs. The 40-fold lifetime tuning (42 ps vs 1692 ps) is a direct ratio of measured TRPL decays and does not require the reference lifetime. The Purcell-factor normalization F_p = T'_1/T_1 uses an ensemble bulk lifetime measured under above-barrier excitation; Supplementary Section 5 explicitly warns that above-barrier excitation gives carrier-relaxation-contaminated lifetimes, so the quantitative enhancement/inhibition split is a genuine calibration caveat, but not a circular reduction, since T'_1 is an external measurement rather than an output of the cavity model. The Lorentzian curves in Fig. 3E are fits to the same lifetime data with an independently measured cavity linewidth (0.394 meV), and the QD B 'prediction' is an extrapolation from the measured Q factor, so neither is a fitted input disguised as a prediction. Self-citations (refs. 49, 55, 83) are used for standard Purcell modeling and carrier-relaxation context and are not load-bearing for the central claim. The paper also lacks a same-dot intrinsic-lifetime control or field-dependence verification, which further limits the enhancement/inhibition attribution; this is an experimental-control limitation, not a circularity. Overall the paper is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard quantum-optics perturbation theory plus domain assumptions about the moiré cavity design and the magnetic-field tuning of the QD. The structural parameters are chosen by hand, not fitted to the target lifetime data. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Moiré lattice constants a1, a2 = a1=209.1 nm, a2=194.1 nm
    Chosen so that L=13a1=14a2, the key moiré condition; not fitted to measured lifetimes but selected to place the flatband near the QD emission.
  • Hole diameter d and magic distance s = d=133 nm, s=95 nm
    Design parameters set by simulation to optimize flatband formation and Q factor; they are hand-chosen inputs, not outputs of a fit to the experiment.
  • Lorentzian fit amplitude and center for Fig. 3E = not reported
    Fitted to the measured T1 detuning data to display the cavity resonance; does not enter the main 40-fold claim.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Fermi golden rule and Markov approximation for spontaneous emission
    Supplementary Sec. 3.2 derives Gamma from second-order perturbation theory; this is the standard quantum-optics treatment.
  • domain assumption Uniform field distribution across y-z cross section of quasi-1D structure
    Supplementary Eq. S7/S10 assumes transverse uniformity to define LDOS; the real fabricated membrane has finite width and holes.
  • domain assumption Ideal flatband gives divergent DOS; finite structures have finite Q
    Used to argue for nearly infinite Purcell enhancement; experiments show Q~3500, so the ideal limit is only approximated.
  • domain assumption QD behaves as a two-level emitter in the weak coupling regime
    Supplementary Sec. 3.1; no strong coupling is observed, and single-photon purity supports one quantum emitter.
  • domain assumption Magnetic field tunes QD energy via Zeeman effect while leaving intrinsic dipole and lifetime unchanged
    Relied on in Fig. 3A,E to attribute the full lifetime change to the cavity; not explicitly tested on the same dot without a cavity.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Cavity-Quantum Electrodynamics with Moir\'e Flatband Photonic Crystals." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EHTTL47C

@misc{pith2026241116830,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Cavity-Quantum Electrodynamics with Moir\'e Flatband Photonic Crystals},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EHTTL47C}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16830}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum emitters are a key component in photonic quantum technologies. Enhancing their single-photon emission by engineering the photonic environment using cavities can significantly improve the overall efficiency in quantum information processing. However, this enhancement is often constrained by the need for precise nanoscale control over the emitter's position within micro- or nano-cavities. Inspired by the fascinating physics of moir\'e patterns, we present an approach to strongly modify the spontaneous emission rate of a quantum emitter using a finely designed multilayer moir\'e photonic crystal with a robust isolated-flatband dispersion. Theoretical analysis reveals that, due to its nearly infinite photonic density of states, the moir\'e cavity can simultaneously achieve a high Purcell factor and exhibit large tolerance over the emitter's position. We experimentally demonstrate the coupling between this moir\'e cavity and a quantum dot through the cavity-determined polarization of the dot's emission. The radiative lifetime of the quantum dot can be tuned by a factor of 40, ranging from 42 ps to 1692 ps, which is attributed to strong Purcell enhancement and Purcell inhibition effects. Our findings pave the way for moir\'e flatband cavity-enhanced quantum light sources, quantum optical switches, and quantum nodes for quantum internet applications.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16830 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Schematics of photon emission in various photonic structures. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Design and characterization of moiré flatband cavity. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Manipulation of single photon emission from a QD in moiré flatband cavity. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematics of photon emission in various photonic structures. A quantum emitter marked by red filled circle, respectively placed in (A) a traditional Fabry-Pérot cavity, (B) 1D defect PhC cavity, and (C) moiré PhC cavity. Green dashed circles stand for quantum emitters…
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Design and characterization of moiré flatband cavity. (a) Two unit cells (gray dashed rectangles) of 1D moiré PhC composed of two 1D PhCs (brown and blue circles) with slightly different lattice constants (a1 = 209.1 nm, a2 = 194.1 nm). Other structural parame￾ters: d …
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Manipulation of single photon emission from a QD in moiré flatband cavity. (A) Magnetic-field-dependent PL spectra of a QD and moiré cavity mode. The QD emission is split into two branches in an external magnetic field applied parallel to the QD growth axis (Faraday ge…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 78 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    M. O. Scully, M. S. Zubairy,Quantum optics(Cambridge university press) (1997)

    1997

  2. [2]

    N. Tomm, A. Javadi, N. O. Antoniadis, D. Najer, M. C. Löbl, A. R. Korsch, R. Schott, S. R. Valentin, A. D. Wieck, A. Ludwig, R. J. Warburton, A bright and fast source of coherent single photons.Nat. Nanotechnol.16, 399–403 (2021)

    2021

  3. [3]

    Y . O. Dudin, A. Kuzmich, Strongly Interacting Rydberg Excitations of a Cold Atomic Gas. Science336, 887–889 (2012)

    2012

  4. [4]

    Kurtsiefer, S

    C. Kurtsiefer, S. Mayer, P. Zarda, H. Weinfurter, Stable Solid-State Source of Single Pho- tons.Phys. Rev. Lett.85, 290–293 (2000)

    2000

  5. [5]

    Walmsley, Quantum optics: Science and technology in a new light.Science348, 525–530 (2015)

    I. Walmsley, Quantum optics: Science and technology in a new light.Science348, 525–530 (2015)

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Couteau, S

    C. Couteau, S. Barz, T. Durt, T. Gerrits, J. Huwer, R. Prevedel, J. Rarity, A. Shields, G. Weihs, Applications of single photons to quantum communication and computing.Nat. Rev. Phys.5, 326–338 (2023)

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    Walther, B

    H. Walther, B. T. Varcoe, B.-G. Englert, T. Becker, Cavity quantum electrodynamics.Rep. Prog. Phys.69, 1325 (2006). 16

    work page 2006

  8. [8]

    Arcari, I

    M. Arcari, I. Söllner, A. Javadi, S. Lindskov Hansen, S. Mahmoodian, J. Liu, H. Thyrrestrup, E. Lee, J. Song, S. Stobbe, P. Lodahl, Near-Unity Coupling Efficiency of a Quantum Emitter to a Photonic Crystal Waveguide.Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 093603 (2014)

    work page 2014

Show all 84 references
  1. [9]

    Lodahl, S

    P. Lodahl, S. Mahmoodian, S. Stobbe, Interfacing single photons and single quantum dots with photonic nanostructures.Rev. Mod. Phys.87, 347–400 (2015)

    2015

  2. [10]

    Somaschi, V

    N. Somaschi, V . Giesz, L. De Santis, J. C. Loredo, M. P. Almeida, G. Hornecker, S. L. Portalupi, T. Grange, C. Antón, J. Demory, C. Gómez, I. Sagnes, N. D. Lanzillotti-Kimura, A. Lemaítre, A. Auffeves, A. G. White, L. Lanco, P. Senellart, Near-optimal single-photon sources in...

    2016

  3. [11]

    R. Ohta, Y . Ota, M. Nomura, N. Kumagai, S. Ishida, S. Iwamoto, Y . Arakawa, Strong coupling between a photonic crystal nanobeam cavity and a single quantum dot.Appl. Phys. Lett.98, 173104 (2011)

    2011

  4. [12]

    Reitzenstein, G

    S. Reitzenstein, G. S˛ ek, A. Löffler, C. Hofmann, S. Kuhn, J. P. Reithmaier, L. V . Keldysh, V . D. Kulakovskii, T. L. Reinecke, A. Forchel, Strong coupling in a single quantum dot semiconductor microcavity system, vol. 6115 (2006), p. 61151M

    2006

  5. [13]

    Yoshie, A

    T. Yoshie, A. Scherer, J. Hendrickson, G. Khitrova, H. M. Gibbs, G. Rupper, C. Ell, O. B. Shchekin, D. G. Deppe, Vacuum Rabi splitting with a single quantum dot in a photonic crystal nanocavity.Nature432, 200–203 (2004)

    2004

  6. [14]

    Javadi, I

    A. Javadi, I. Söllner, M. Arcari, S. L. Hansen, L. Midolo, S. Mahmoodian, G. Kiršansk ˙e, T. Pregnolato, E. H. Lee, J. D. Song, S. Stobbe, P. Lodahl, Single-photon non-linear optics with a quantum dot in a waveguide.Nat. Commun.6, 8655 (2015). 17

    2015

  7. [15]

    Söllner, S

    I. Söllner, S. Mahmoodian, S. L. Hansen, L. Midolo, A. Javadi, G. Kiršansk ˙e, T. Pregno- lato, H. El-Ella, E. H. Lee, J. D. Song, S. Stobbe, P. Lodahl, Deterministic photon–emitter coupling in chiral photonic circuits.Nat. Nanotechnol.10, 775–778 (2015)

    2015

  8. [16]

    E. Waks, J. Vuckovic, Dipole Induced Transparency in Drop-Filter Cavity-Waveguide Sys- tems.Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 153601 (2006)

    2006

  9. [17]

    C. L. Cortes, Z. Jacob, Super-Coulombic atom–atom interactions in hyperbolic media.Nat. Commun.8, 14144 (2017)

    2017

  10. [18]

    Gonzalez-Tudela, D

    A. Gonzalez-Tudela, D. Martin-Cano, E. Moreno, L. Martin-Moreno, C. Tejedor, F. J. Garcia-Vidal, Entanglement of Two Qubits Mediated by One-Dimensional Plasmonic Waveguides.Phys. Rev. Lett.106, 020501 (2011)

    2011

  11. [19]

    González-Tudela, J

    A. González-Tudela, J. I. Cirac, Exotic quantum dynamics and purely long-range coherent interactions in Dirac conelike baths.Phys. Rev. A97, 043831 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    L. Ying, M. Zhou, M. Mattei, B. Liu, P. Campagnola, R. H. Goldsmith, Z. Yu, Extended Range of Dipole-Dipole Interactions in Periodically Structured Photonic Media.Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 173901 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    I. n. García-Elcano, A. González-Tudela, J. Bravo-Abad, Tunable and Robust Long-Range Coherent Interactions between Quantum Emitters Mediated by Weyl Bound States.Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 163602 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Fleury, A

    R. Fleury, A. Alù, Enhanced superradiance in epsilon-near-zero plasmonic channels.Phys. Rev. B87, 201101 (2013)

    2013

  15. [23]

    H. Tang, X. Ni, F. Du, V . Srikrishna, E. Mazur, On-chip light trapping in bilayer moiré photonic crystal slabs.Appl. Phys. Lett.121, 231702 (2022). 18

    2022

  16. [24]

    K. J. Vahala, Optical Microcavities.Nature424, 839–846 (2003)

    2003

  17. [25]

    Badolato, K

    A. Badolato, K. Hennessy, M. Atature, J. Dreiser, E. Hu, P. M. Petroff, A. Imamoglu, Deterministic coupling of single quantum dots to single nanocavity modes.Science308, 1158–1161 (2005)

    2005

  18. [26]

    Y . Cao, V . Fatemi, A. Demir, S. Fang, S. L. Tomarken, J. Y . Luo, J. D. Sanchez-Yamagishi, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, E. Kaxiras,et al., Correlated insulator behaviour at half-filling in magic-angle graphene superlattices.Nature556, 80–84 (2018)

    2018

  19. [27]

    K. F. Mak, J. Shan, Semiconductor moiré materials.Nat. Nanotechnol.17, 686–695 (2022)

    2022

  20. [28]

    E. Y . Andrei, D. K. Efetov, P. Jarillo-Herrero, A. H. MacDonald, K. F. Mak, T. Senthil, E. Tutuc, A. Yazdani, A. F. Young, The marvels of moiré materials.Nat. Rev. Mater .6, 201–206 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    Mao, Z.-K

    X.-R. Mao, Z.-K. Shao, H.-Y . Luan, S.-L. Wang, R.-M. Ma, Magic-angle lasers in nanos- tructured moiré superlattice.Nat. Nanotechnol.16, 1099–1105 (2021)

    2021

  22. [30]

    D. X. Nguyen, X. Letartre, E. Drouard, P. Viktorovitch, H. C. Nguyen, H. S. Nguyen, Magic configurations in moiré superlattice of bilayer photonic crystals: Almost-perfect flatbands and unconventional localization.Phys. Rev. Res.4, L032031 (2022)

    2022

  23. [31]

    X. Wang, Z. Liu, B. Chen, G. Qiu, D. Wei, J. Liu, Experimental Demonstration of High- Efficiency Harmonic Generation in Photonic Moiré Superlattice Microcavities.Nano Lett. 24, 11327–11333 (2024)

    2024

  24. [32]

    Oudich, X

    M. Oudich, X. Kong, T. Zhang, C. Qiu, Y . Jing, Engineered moiré photonic and phononic superlattices.Nat. Mater .23, 1169–1178 (2024). 19

    2024

  25. [33]

    P. Wang, Y . Zheng, X. Chen, C. Huang, Y . V . Kartashov, L. Torner, V . V . Konotop, F. Ye, Lo- calization and delocalization of light in photonic moiré lattices.Nature577, 42–46 (2020)

    2020

  26. [34]

    D. Yu, G. Li, L. Wang, D. Leykam, L. Yuan, X. Chen, Moiré Lattice in One-Dimensional Synthetic Frequency Dimension.Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 143801 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    A. Raun, H. Tang, X. Ni, E. Mazur, E. L. Hu, GaN Magic Angle Laser in a Merged Moiré Photonic Crystal.ACS Photonics10, 3001–3007 (2023)

    2023

  28. [36]

    J. Bao, Z. Fu, T. Pramanik, J. Mao, Y . Chi, Y . Cao, C. Zhai, Y . Mao, T. Dai, X. Chen, X. Jia, L. Zhao, Y . Zheng, B. Tang, Z. Li, J. Luo, W. Wang, Y . Yang, Y . Peng, D. Liu, D. Dai, Q. He, A. L. Muthali, L. K. Oxenløwe, C. Vigliar, S. Paesani, H. Hou, R. Santagati, J. W. S...

    2023

  29. [37]

    J. M. Arrazola, V . Bergholm, K. Brádler, T. R. Bromley, M. J. Collins, I. Dhand, A. Fuma- galli, T. Gerrits, A. Goussev, L. G. Helt, J. Hundal, T. Isacsson, R. B. Israel, J. Izaac, S. Ja- hangiri, R. Janik, N. Killoran, S. P. Kumar, J. Lavoie, A. E. Lita, D. H. Mahler, M. Men...

    2021

  30. [38]

    Shang, K

    C. Shang, K. Feng, E. T. Hughes, A. Clark, M. Debnath, R. Koscica, G. Leake, J. Herman, D. Harame, P. Ludewig, Y . Wan, J. E. Bowers, Electrically pumped quantum-dot lasers grown on 300 mm patterned Si photonic wafers.Light Sci. Appl.11, 299 (2022). 20

    2022

  31. [39]

    W.-Q. Wei, A. He, B. Yang, Z.-H. Wang, J.-Z. Huang, D. Han, M. Ming, X. Guo, Y . Su, J.-J. Zhang, T. Wang, Monolithic integration of embedded III-V lasers on SOI.Light Sci. Appl.12, 84 (2023)

    2023

  32. [40]

    Di Benedetto, A

    E. Di Benedetto, A. Gonzalez-Tudela, F. Ciccarello, Dipole-dipole interactions mediated by a photonic flat band.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.20382(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    C.-Y . Hao, Z. Zhan, P. A. Pantaleón, J.-Q. He, Y .-X. Zhao, K. Watanabe, T. Taniguchi, F. Guinea, L. He, Robust flat bands in twisted trilayer graphene moiré quasicrystals.Nat. Commun.15, 8437 (2024)

    2024

  34. [42]

    Y . Wan, S. Zhang, J. C. Norman, M. J. Kennedy, W. He, S. Liu, C. Xiang, C. Shang, J.-J. He, A. C. Gossard, J. E. Bowers, Tunable quantum dot lasers grown directly on silicon. Optica6, 1394 (2019)

    2019

  35. [43]

    T. Zhou, M. Tang, G. Xiang, B. Xiang, S. Hark, M. Martin, T. Baron, S. Pan, J.-S. Park, Z. Liu, S. Chen, Z. Zhang, H. Liu, Continuous-wave quantum dot photonic crystal lasers grown on on-axis Si (001).Nat. Commun.11, 977 (2020)

    2020

  36. [44]

    Saadi, H

    C. Saadi, H. S. Nguyen, S. Cueff, L. Ferrier, X. Letartre, S. Callard, How many supercells are required for unconventional light confinement in moiré photonic lattices?Optica11, 245 (2024)

    2024

  37. [45]

    Fujita, S

    M. Fujita, S. Takahashi, Y . Tanaka, T. Asano, S. Noda, Simultaneous Inhibition and Re- distribution of Spontaneous Light Emission in Photonic Crystals.Science308, 1296–1298 (2005)

    2005

  38. [46]

    R. H. Brown, R. Q. Twiss, Correlation between Photons in Two Coherent Beams of Light. Nature177, 27–29 (1956). 21

    1956

  39. [47]

    Bayer, G

    M. Bayer, G. Ortner, O. Stern, A. Kuther, A. A. Gorbunov, A. Forchel, P. Hawrylak, S. Fa- fard, K. Hinzer, T. L. Reinecke, S. N. Walck, J. P. Reithmaier, F. Klopf, F. Schäfer, Fine structure of neutral and charged excitons in self-assembled In(Ga)As/(Al)GaAs quantum dots.Phys....

    2002

  40. [48]

    Z. Hao, K. Zou, Y . Meng, J.-Y . Yan, F. Li, Y . Huo, C.-Y . Jin, F. Liu, T. Descamps, A. Iovan, V . Zwiller, X. Hu, High-performance eight-channel system with fractal superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors.Chip3, 100087 (2024)

    2024

  41. [49]

    Quilter, A

    J. Quilter, A. Brash, F. Liu, M. Glässl, A. Barth, V . Axt, A. Ramsay, M. Skolnick, A. Fox, Phonon-Assisted Population Inversion of a Single InGaAs / GaAs Quantum Dot by Pulsed Laser Excitation.Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 137401 (2015)

    2015

  42. [50]

    Coste, D

    N. Coste, D. A. Fioretto, N. Belabas, S. C. Wein, P. Hilaire, R. Frantzeskakis, M. Gundin, B. Goes, N. Somaschi, M. Morassi, A. Lemaître, I. Sagnes, A. Harouri, S. E. Economou, A. Auffeves, O. Krebs, L. Lanco, P. Senellart, High-rate entanglement between a semicon- ductor spin...

    2023

  43. [51]

    Bayer, T

    M. Bayer, T. L. Reinecke, F. Weidner, A. Larionov, A. McDonald, A. Forchel, Inhibition and Enhancement of the Spontaneous Emission of Quantum Dots in Structured Microres- onators.Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 3168–3171 (2001)

    2001

  44. [52]

    Englund, D

    D. Englund, D. Fattal, E. Waks, G. Solomon, B. Zhang, T. Nakaoka, Y . Arakawa, Y . Ya- mamoto, J. Vuˇckovi´c, Controlling the Spontaneous Emission Rate of Single Quantum Dots in a Two-Dimensional Photonic Crystal.Phys. Rev. Lett.95, 013904 (2005)

    2005

  45. [53]

    R. G. Hulet, E. S. Hilfer, D. Kleppner, Inhibited Spontaneous Emission by a Rydberg Atom. Phys. Rev. Lett.55, 2137–2140 (1985). 22

    1985

  46. [54]

    Lodahl, A

    P. Lodahl, A. Floris Van Driel, I. S. Nikolaev, A. Irman, K. Overgaag, D. Vanmaekelbergh, W. L. V os, Controlling the dynamics of spontaneous emission from quantum dots by pho- tonic crystals.Nature430, 654–657 (2004)

    2004

  47. [55]

    F. Liu, A. J. Brash, J. O’Hara, L. M. P. P. Martins, C. L. Phillips, R. J. Coles, B. Royall, E. Clarke, C. Bentham, N. Prtljaga, I. E. Itskevich, L. R. Wilson, M. S. Skolnick, A. M. Fox, High Purcell factor generation of indistinguishable on-chip single photons.Nat. Nan- otech...

    2018

  48. [56]

    T. H. Talukdar, A. L. Hardison, J. D. Ryckman, Moiré Effects in Silicon Photonic Nanowires.ACS Photonics9, 1286–1294 (2022)

    2022

  49. [57]

    D. X. Nguyen, X. Letartre, E. Drouard, P. Viktorovitch, H. C. Nguyen, H. S. Nguyen, Magic configurations in Moiré Superlattice of Bilayer Photonic Crystal: Almost-Perfect Flatbands and Unconventional Localization.Phys. Rev. Res.4, L032031 (2022)

    2022

  50. [58]

    Ma, H.-Y

    R.-M. Ma, H.-Y . Luan, Z.-W. Zhao, W.-Z. Mao, S.-L. Wang, Y .-H. Ouyang, Z.-K. Shao, Twisted lattice nanocavity with theoretical quality factor exceeding 200 billion.Fundam. Res.3, 537–543 (2023)

    2023

  51. [59]

    X. Gao, C. W. Hsu, B. Zhen, X. Lin, J. D. Joannopoulos, M. Solja ˇci´c, H. Chen, Formation mechanism of guided resonances and bound states in the continuum in photonic crystal slabs.Sci. Rep.6, 31908 (2016)

    2016

  52. [60]

    C. W. Hsu, B. Zhen, A. D. Stone, J. D. Joannopoulos, M. Solja ˇci´c, Bound states in the continuum.Nat. Rev. Mater .1, 16048 (2016)

    2016

  53. [61]

    D. C. Marinica, A. G. Borisov, S. V . Shabanov, Bound States in the Continuum in Photon- ics.Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 183902 (2008). 23

    2008

  54. [62]

    Koshelev, S

    K. Koshelev, S. Lepeshov, M. Liu, A. Bogdanov, Y . Kivshar, Asymmetric Metasurfaces with High-Q Resonances Governed by Bound States in the Continuum.Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 193903 (2018)

    2018

  55. [63]

    Sipahigil, R

    A. Sipahigil, R. E. Evans, D. D. Sukachev, M. J. Burek, J. Borregaard, M. K. Bhaskar, C. T. Nguyen, J. L. Pacheco, H. A. Atikian, C. Meuwly,et al., An integrated diamond nanophotonics platform for quantum-optical networks.Science354, 847–850 (2016)

    2016

  56. [64]

    Y .-M. He, G. Clark, J. R. Schaibley, Y . He, M.-C. Chen, Y .-J. Wei, X. Ding, Q. Zhang, W. Yao, X. Xu, C.-Y . Lu, J.-W. Pan, Single quantum emitters in monolayer semiconductors. Nat. Nanotechnol.10, 497–502 (2015)

    2015

  57. [65]

    A. E. Kaplan, C. J. Krajewska, A. H. Proppe, W. Sun, T. Sverko, D. B. Berkinsky, H. Utzat, M. G. Bawendi, Hong–Ou–Mandel interference in colloidal CsPbBr3 perovskite nanocrys- tals.Nat. Photonics17, 775–780 (2023)

    2023

  58. [66]

    Michler, A

    P. Michler, A. Kiraz, C. Becher, W. Schoenfeld, P. Petroff, L. Zhang, E. Hu, A. Imamoglu, A quantum dot single-photon turnstile device.Science290, 2282–2285 (2000)

    2000

  59. [67]

    Ding, Y .-P

    X. Ding, Y .-P. Guo, M.-C. Xu, R.-Z. Liu, G.-Y . Zou, J.-Y . Zhao, Z.-X. Ge, Q.-H. Zhang, H.-L. Liu, L.-J. Wang, M.-C. Chen, H. Wang, Y .-M. He, Y .-H. Huo, C.-Y . Lu, J.-W. Pan, High-efficiency single-photon source above the loss-tolerant threshold for efficient linear optica...

    2023 arXiv

  60. [68]

    J. Liu, R. Su, Y . Wei, B. Yao, S. F. C. d. Silva, Y . Yu, J. Iles-Smith, K. Srinivasan, A. Rastelli, J. Li,et al., A solid-state source of strongly entangled photon pairs with high brightness and indistinguishability.Nat. Nanotechnol.14, 586–593 (2019)

    2019

  61. [69]

    M. B. Rota, T. M. Krieger, Q. Buchinger, M. Beccaceci, J. Neuwirth, H. Huet, N. Horová, G. Lovicu, G. Ronco, S. F. Covre da Silva, G. Pettinari, M. Moczała-Dusanowska, 24 C. Kohlberger, S. Manna, S. Stroj, J. Freund, X. Yuan, C. Schneider, M. Ježek, S. Höfling, F. Basso Basset...

    2024

  62. [70]

    Siampour, C

    H. Siampour, C. O’Rourke, A. J. Brash, M. N. Makhonin, R. Dost, D. J. Hallett, E. Clarke, P. K. Patil, M. S. Skolnick, A. M. Fox, Observation of large spontaneous emission rate enhancement of quantum dots in a broken-symmetry slow-light waveguide.npj Quantum Inf.(2023)

    2023

  63. [71]

    Hacker, S

    B. Hacker, S. Welte, G. Rempe, S. Ritter, A photon–photon quantum gate based on a single atom in an optical resonator.Nature536, 193–196 (2016)

    2016

  64. [72]

    H. Kim, R. Bose, T. C. Shen, G. S. Solomon, E. Waks, A quantum logic gate between a solid-state quantum bit and a photon.Nat. Photonics7, 373–377 (2013)

    2013

  65. [73]

    Niemietz, P

    D. Niemietz, P. Farrera, S. Langenfeld, G. Rempe, Nondestructive detection of photonic qubits.Nature591, 570–574 (2021)

    2021

  66. [74]

    Thomas, L

    P. Thomas, L. Ruscio, O. Morin, G. Rempe, Efficient generation of entangled multiphoton graph states from a single atom.Nature608, 677–681 (2022)

    2022

  67. [75]

    S. Sun, H. Kim, Z. Luo, G. S. Solomon, E. Waks, A single-photon switch and transistor enabled by a solid-state quantum memory.Science361, 57–60 (2018)

    2018

  68. [76]

    H. J. Kimble, The quantum internet.Nature453, 1023–1030 (2008)

    2008

  69. [77]

    Hennessy, A

    K. Hennessy, A. Badolato, M. Winger, D. Gerace, M. Atatüre, S. Gulde, S. Fält, E. L. Hu, A. Imamo ˘glu, Quantum nature of a strongly coupled single quantum dot–cavity system. Nature445, 896–899 (2007). 25

    2007

  70. [78]

    Kuruma, Y

    K. Kuruma, Y . Ota, M. Kakuda, S. Iwamoto, Y . Arakawa, Surface-passivated high-Q GaAs photonic crystal nanocavity with quantum dots.APL Photon.5(2020)

    2020

  71. [79]

    R. Bose, D. Sridharan, H. Kim, G. S. Solomon, E. Waks, Low-Photon-Number Optical Switching with a Single Quantum Dot Coupled to a Photonic Crystal Cavity.Phys. Rev. Lett.108, 227402 (2012)

    2012

  72. [80]

    V olz, A

    T. V olz, A. Reinhard, M. Winger, A. Badolato, K. J. Hennessy, E. L. Hu, A. Imamo ˘glu, Ultrafast all-optical switching by single photons.Nat. Photonics6, 605–609 (2012)

    2012

  73. [81]

    Berstermann, T

    T. Berstermann, T. Auer, H. Kurtze, M. Schwab, D. R. Yakovlev, M. Bayer, J. Wiersig, C. Gies, F. Jahnke, D. Reuter, A. D. Wieck, Systematic study of carrier correlations in the electron-hole recombination dynamics of quantum dots.Phys. Rev. B76, 165318 (2007)

    2007

  74. [82]

    Reithmaier, F

    G. Reithmaier, F. Flassig, P. Hasch, S. Lichtmannecker, K. Müller, J. Vu ˇckovi´c, R. Gross, M. Kaniber, J. J. Finley, A carrier relaxation bottleneck probed in single InGaAs quantum dots using integrated superconducting single photon detectors.Appl. Phys. Lett.105(2014)

    2014

  75. [83]

    J.-Y . Yan, C. Chen, X.-D. Zhang, Y .-T. Wang, H.-G. Babin, A. D. Wieck, A. Ludwig, Y . Meng, X. Hu, H. Duan, W. Chen, W. Fang, M. Cygorek, X. Lin, D.-W. Wang, C.-Y . Jin, F. Liu, Coherent control of a high-orbital hole in a semiconductor quantum dot.Nat. Nanotechnol.18, 1139–...

    2023

  76. [84]

    Moiré Cavity-Quantum Electrodynamics

    E. A. Zibik, T. Grange, B. A. Carpenter, N. E. Porter, R. Ferreira, G. Bastard, D. Stehr, S. Winnerl, M. Helm, H. Y . Liu, M. S. Skolnick, L. R. Wilson, Long lifetimes of quantum- dot intersublevel transitions in the terahertz range.Nat. Mater .8, 803–807 (2009). 26 Acknowledg...

    2009

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.