Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Entangled dual-comb spectroscopy

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Entangled dual-comb spectroscopy beats the classical shot-noise limit in gas detection.

desk verdict A credible first demonstration of entanglement-enhanced dual-comb spectroscopy, but the headline 2.6 dB advantage rests on a classical baseline whose power is not reported. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.19800 v1 pith:ECYCTOJR submitted 2024-12-27 quant-ph physics.optics

Abdulkarim Hariri , Shuai Liu , Haowei Shi , Quntao Zhuang , Xudong Fan , Zheshen Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phphysics.optics
keywords entangleddual-combspectroscopyquantumfrequencycombtwo-modesqueezedvacuumstandardlimitquantum-enhancedheterodynedetectiongassensingshot-noise-limitedmeasurement
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 reports the first experimental demonstration of an entangled dual-comb spectrometer that reads out every comb line below the standard quantum limit of classical dual-comb spectroscopy. In a classical dual-comb spectrometer, the shot noise of the optical comb sets a floor on the signal-to-noise ratio achievable in a given integration time. The authors replace the classical signal comb with a bright entangled comb built from two-mode squeezed vacuum states and detect it in a heterodyne configuration with a strong local-oscillator comb. They report a 2.6 dB improvement in signal-to-noise ratio and a 1.7-fold reduction in integration time for hydrogen-cyanide gas detection compared with the same setup run classically. If correct, this turns entanglement into a practical resource for fast, power-constrained spectroscopic sensing rather than a theoretical proposal.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the two-mode squeezed vacuum (TMSV) frequency comb produced by a seeded optical parametric oscillator: each pair of symmetric comb lines $\hat{a}_{S_n}$ and $\hat{a}_{S_{-n}}$ shares the entanglement generated by the Hamiltonian $H = i\hbar\chi \sum_n (\hat{a}_{S_{-n}}^\dagger \hat{a}_{S_n}^\dagger - \hat{a}_{S_{-n}}\hat{a}_{S_n})$. A classical comb displaces each TMSV pair on an unbalanced beam splitter, turning the vacuum-level entangled state into a bright displaced two-mode squeezed state; a matched local-oscillator comb then measures the squeezed quadrature of every pair in a single heterodyne acquisition. This combination is what makes simultaneous sub-shot-noise readout of all comb lines possible, and it is the feature that distinguishes EDCS from schemes needing a squeezed local oscillator or a nonlinear quantum comb source.

What would settle it

Run the classical signal comb at the same 4 nW total power on the sample as the entangled signal comb, with its phase noise suppressed by the same programmable-filter settings, and compare the signal-to-noise ratio of the two readouts; if the classical signal-to-noise ratio reaches the entangled one, the claimed 2.6 dB sub-shot-noise advantage disappears.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that entangling the spectral lines of a frequency comb lets a dual-comb spectrometer beat the standard quantum limit for all lines at once. In the experiment, an optical parametric oscillator below threshold generates an entangled comb whose central line is a displaced single-mode squeezed state and whose sideband pairs are two-mode squeezed vacuum states. A classical comb displaces every pair on a 99/1 beam splitter, producing a bright entangled signal comb at 4 nW total power that interrogates a hydrogen-cyanide gas cell. A local-oscillator comb with the same line spacing beats against all signal lines simultaneously, and the measured noise in the squeezed quadrature lies below the vacuum, shot-noise level for every line. Against the classical version of the same apparatus, EDCS achieves a 2.6 dB signal-to-noise ratio enhancement and a 1.7-fold integration-time speedup, and the advantage persists at absorption depths up to 3 dB because only a fraction of comb lines suffer loss.

Load-bearing premise

The 2.6 dB advantage assumes the classical baseline is running at a fair, near-optimal power; the paper does not give the classical comb's power for the headline comparison, and elsewhere it deliberately weakens the classical comb to suppress phase noise, so part of the gap could be classical rather than quantum.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Gas detection with EDCS reaches a given transmittance precision in 1.7 times fewer averaged interferograms than the same apparatus run classically.
  • A 2.6 dB signal-to-noise ratio advantage over classical DCS is demonstrated, and the paper's theory indicates the advantage grows with higher squeezing, lower phase noise, and better mode matching.
  • The quantum advantage survives sample absorption up to 3 dB for a comb with a 10:1 ratio of unattenuated to attenuated lines, because loss only affects a minority of comb lines.
  • The scheme avoids the difficult nonlinear quantum-comb sources required by earlier proposals, using an OPO TMSV comb plus electro-optic combs, and is compatible with silicon-photonics integration.
  • Spectral coverage can be extended without losing the quantum advantage by sweeping the RF frequencies within the 400 MHz squeezing bandwidth and using cascaded electro-optic modulators for broadband coverage.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural extension would be to map the quantum advantage as a function of the classical signal-comb power, which would separate the entanglement contribution from the phase-noise suppression gained by deliberately running the classical comb at low power.
  • Because EDCS already works with electro-optic combs at telecom wavelengths, the same architecture could plausibly be transplanted to mid-infrared wavelengths, where many molecular fingerprints are stronger, using difference-frequency generation.
  • The robustness-to-loss mechanism suggests that EDCS could combine naturally with dual-comb ranging or frequency-modulation spectroscopy, where only a few comb lines carry the signal and the high unattenuated-to-attenuated line ratio would apply almost automatically.
  • The two aliasing-resolution methods described in the paper could likely be merged into a single-shot readout, potentially shortening integration times further than the demonstrated 1.7-fold speedup.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper reports an experimental implementation of entangled dual-comb spectroscopy (EDCS), in which a below-threshold optical parametric oscillator produces a frequency comb of two-mode squeezed vacuum pairs (plus a central squeezed line), a classical comb coherently displaces these modes to form a bright entangled signal comb, and heterodyne detection against a local-oscillator comb yields an RF comb spectrum. The authors report 2.1–2.8 dB of squeezing, a 2.6 dB SNR enhancement over classical DCS, a 1.7-fold reduction in integration time, and a hydrogen-cyanide transmittance spectrum in good agreement with HITRAN2020. They also discuss approaches to resolve radio-frequency aliasing, the robustness of the quantum advantage against sample absorption, and avenues for future improvement.

Significance. If the central claim is substantiated, this would be the first experimental demonstration of an entanglement-based dual-comb spectrometer that beats the standard quantum limit of classical DCS. The work is significant for quantum metrology and spectroscopy, and it is strengthened by direct squeezed-quadrature measurements against vacuum noise, an explicit benchmark definition against a classical protocol with the same comb configuration, and a wavelength-calibrated absorption measurement against an external database. The main unresolved issue is whether the classical DCS baseline used for the headline SNR comparison is a fair, equal-power, shot-noise-limited representative; the manuscript currently does not provide the power budget needed to verify this.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 2 and Appendix ('Characterization of entangled comb'), Figs. 3a and 5b] The speedup claim of 1.7 in Sec. 3 is based on the precision-versus-interferogram curves in Fig. 5b, but the ordinate and estimator are not defined, and no error bars or repetition counts are provided. The paper should state how the transmittance precision σ_n is estimated, what quantity is plotted, and how many independent measurements support each curve. Without this information, and without confirmation that the classical curve is measured at the same signal power and is shot-noise-limited, the factor of 1.7 cannot be independently validated.
  2. [Sec. 3 and Fig. 5b] The speedup claim of 1.7 in Sec. 3 is based on the precision-versus-interferogram curves in Fig. 5b, but the ordinate and estimator are not defined, and no error bars or repetition counts are provided. The paper should state how the transmittance precision σ_n is estimated, what quantity is plotted, and how many independent measurements support each curve. Without this information, and without confirmation that the classical curve is measured at the same signal power and is shot-noise-limited, the factor of 1.7 cannot be independently validated.
  3. [Sec. 2, Abstract, and Fig. 4] The abstract and Sec. 2 claim that EDCS enables simultaneous detection of all comb lines below the standard quantum limit, but the demonstrated squeezing and SNR advantage are for a single OPO configuration with 10 signal comb lines, while the 500-line spectrum in Fig. 4 is obtained by sweeping the CW laser across 50 center frequencies. The paper does not show that the 2.6 dB advantage is maintained across the swept spectrum, nor does it explain how the LO comb and Waveshaper are reconfigured at each center frequency without degrading the per-line squeezing. Please either restrict the claim to the demonstrated 10-line bandwidth or provide per-line advantage data across the full sweep.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Appendix ('Characterization of entangled comb')] The sentence 'the entangled signal comb is generated with a total power of 4 nW (Fig. 3a), consisting of 10 signal comb lines alongside a central comb line with a power of 2 µW' is numerically inconsistent; please clarify whether 4 nW is the total power of the non-central lines or a per-line value.
  2. [Fig. 2] Figure 2 contains multiple Unicode rendering artifacts such as '/uni0302aS−1', '/uni0394/uni03BD', and '/uni0302aS1', which make the spectral-structure figure difficult to read; please regenerate the figure with proper math fonts.
  3. [Fig. 5b] The axes of Fig. 5b are not labeled clearly and the caption appears to contain garbled substitutions; please specify the ordinate (e.g., transmittance precision in linear or dB units) and include error bars for the precision estimates.
  4. [Sec. 1] In the Introduction, the phrase 'to exceed the such a fundamental limit' should be corrected to 'to exceed such a fundamental limit'.
  5. [Sec. 4 and Supplementary Fig. 2] The statement in Sec. 4 that the source produces '~4 dB' of squeezing should be reconciled with the measured 2.1–2.8 dB squeezing reported in Supplementary Fig. 2; please specify which mode or configuration the 4 dB value refers to.
  6. [References] Reference [45] is a Research Square preprint; if a peer-reviewed version is available, please cite it instead.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the claimed 2.6 dB enhancement is a direct experimental comparison, not a fitted or self-referential prediction.

full rationale

The central result of the paper is an experimental measurement: the RF spectrum from the entangled signal comb is compared with that from the classical signal comb under the same LO and detection chain, and the 2.6 dB SNR advantage is read directly from the spectra (Sec. 2, Fig. 3a), not obtained from a model fitted to the data. The gas-detection accuracy is benchmarked against the external HITRAN2020 database (Sec. 3, Fig. 5a), and the 1.7x integration-time speedup is a separate measured precision curve (Fig. 5b). The theoretical curves in Fig. 6 are illustrative and not the source of the experimental advantage. The paper does cite its own prior protocol [26] and tutorial [4], but these citations are background for the configuration and for a known saturation property of asymmetric DCS; the experimental demonstration is self-contained and falsifiable against external benchmarks. One passage in the Appendix notes that the signal comb power is reduced to sub-nW to suppress phase noise, and the classical baseline power for the headline comparison is not explicitly stated; this is a potential fairness or control issue, not a circular reduction, because no equation or fitted parameter is being reused as the claimed prediction. No step of the derivation is equivalent by construction to its inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The ledger is light: the experiment uses known physical resources (OPO squeezing, EO combs, heterodyne detection) and no new entities. The main unstated inputs are the HITRAN database, standard CV detection theory, and the illustrative simulation parameters in Fig. 6c; none of these are fitted to extract the central 2.6 dB result.

free parameters (1)
  • Flat-top simulation squeezing and anti-squeezing levels = 10 dB squeezing, 15 dB anti-squeezing, UAR ratios 100:1, 20:1, 2:1
    Chosen values for the Fig. 6c loss-robustness simulation; illustrative, not fitted to the experimental data and not required for the measured 2.6 dB gain.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption SPDC Hamiltonian Eq. (1) accurately describes the OPO entangled comb as pairs of two-mode squeezed vacuum states.
    Invoked in Sec. 2 to model the quantum source; standard quantum-optics result but not re-derived.
  • domain assumption Balanced heterodyne detection with a strong classical LO is shot-noise limited and measures the squeezed quadrature of each comb line.
    Central to the SNR claim; standard CV detection theory, cited to Ref. [29] but not derived.
  • domain assumption HITRAN2020 line intensities and broadening reproduce HCN absorption at 25 Torr, 17.5 cm, and the stated temperature.
    Used in Sec. 3 to fit and validate the measured transmittance; accuracy of the database is assumed.
  • domain assumption Phase locks maintain mutual coherence and LO alignment with the squeezed quadrature across all comb lines.
    Required for simultaneous sub-SQL measurement; described qualitatively in Sec. 4 and the Appendix, not quantified.
  • domain assumption The theoretical model underlying Fig. 6 assumes standard CV noise propagation and a given unattenuated-to-attenuated comb-line ratio.
    Fig. 6 theory curves are presented without derivation; the UAR parameter and squeezing levels enter as modeling assumptions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Entangled dual-comb spectroscopy." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ECYCTOJR

@misc{pith2026241219800,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Entangled dual-comb spectroscopy},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ECYCTOJR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.19800}
}
read the original abstract

Optical frequency combs have emerged as a cornerstone for a wide range of areas, including spectroscopy, ranging, optical clocks, time and frequency transfer, waveform synthesis, and communications. However, quantum mechanical fluctuations of the optical carrier impose fundamental performance limits on the precision of traditional classical laser frequency combs, particularly in their use for interferometry and spectroscopy. Entanglement, as a quintessential quantum resource, allows for surpassing the fundamental limits of classical systems. Here, we introduce and experimentally demonstrate entangled dual-comb spectroscopy (EDCS) that surmounts the fundamental limits of classical DCS. EDCS builds on tailored entangled spectral structures of the frequency combs, enabling simultaneous detection of all comb lines below the standard quantum limit of classical DCS. Applying EDCS in gas detection, we achieve a 2.6 dB enhancement in signal-to-noise ratio and a 1.7-fold reduction in integration time over classical DCS, rendering EDCS particularly suited for dynamic chemical and biological sensing, where fast, precise measurements subject to power constraints are required. EDCS represents a new paradigm for quantum frequency combs, underscoring their prospects in a plethora of applications in precision metrology, spectroscopy, and timekeeping.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Wafer-Scale Squeezed-Light Chips

    quant-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A CMOS-compatible silicon nitride platform generates two-mode squeezed light with 2.9-3.1 dB across eight dies on a 4-inch wafer, with less than 0.2 dB variation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [44]

    Squeezed dual-comb spectroscopy

    D.I. Herman, M. Walsh, M.K. Kreider, N. Lordi, E.J. Tsao, A.J. Lind, M. Heyrich, J. Combes, J. Genest, S.A. Diddams, Squeezed dual-comb spectroscopy. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.16688 (2024)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Einstein, B

    A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, N. Rosen, Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review 47(10), 777 (1935)

    work page 1935

  3. [2]

    Schr¨ odinger, Discussion of probability relations between separated systems, in Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, vol

    E. Schr¨ odinger, Discussion of probability relations between separated systems, in Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, vol. 31 (Cambridge University Press, 1935), pp. 555–563

    work page 1935

  4. [3]

    Bell, On the einstein podolsky rosen paradox

    J.S. Bell, On the einstein podolsky rosen paradox. Physics Physique Fizika 1(3), 195 (1964)

    work page 1964

  5. [4]

    Zhang, C

    Z. Zhang, C. You, O.S. Maga˜ na-Loaiza, R. Fickler, R.d.J. Le´ on-Montiel, J.P. Torres, T.S. Humble, S. Liu, Y. Xia, Q. Zhuang, Entanglement-based quantum information technology: a tutorial. Advances in Optics and Photonics 16(1), 60–162 (2024)

    work page 2024

  6. [5]

    Jozsa, N

    R. Jozsa, N. Linden, On the role of entanglement in quantum-computational speed-up. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 459(2036), 2011–2032 (2003)

    work page 2003

  7. [6]

    Ekert, Quantum cryptography based on bell’s theorem

    A.K. Ekert, Quantum cryptography based on bell’s theorem. Physical Review Letters 67(6), 661 (1991)

    work page 1991

  8. [7]

    Ralph, Continuous variable quantum cryptography

    T.C. Ralph, Continuous variable quantum cryptography. Physical Review A 61(1), 010303 (1999)

    work page 1999

Show all 46 references
  1. [8]

    Polzik, J

    E. Polzik, J. Carri, H. Kimble, Spectroscopy with squeezed light. Physical Review Letters 68(20), 3020 (1992)

    1992

  2. [9]

    Y. Xia, W. Li, W. Clark, D. Hart, Q. Zhuang, Z. Zhang, Demonstration of a recon- figurable entangled radio-frequency photonic sensor network. Physical Review Letters 124(15), 150502 (2020)

    2020

  3. [10]

    Guo, C.R

    X. Guo, C.R. Breum, J. Borregaard, S. Izumi, M.V. Larsen, T. Gehring, M. Chri- standl, J.S. Neergaard-Nielsen, U.L. Andersen, Distributed quantum sensing in a continuous-variable entangled network. Nature Physics 16(3), 281–284 (2020)

    2020

  4. [11]

    S. Hao, H. Shi, C.N. Gagatsos, M. Mishra, B. Bash, I. Djordjevic, S. Guha, Q. Zhuang, Z. Zhang, Demonstration of entanglement-enhanced covert sensing. Physical Review Letters 129(1), 010501 (2022)

    2022

  5. [12]

    Pittman, Y

    T.B. Pittman, Y. Shih, D. Strekalov, A.V. Sergienko, Optical imaging by means of two-photon quantum entanglement. Physical Review A 52(5), R3429 (1995)

    1995

  6. [13]

    Picqu´ e, T.W

    N. Picqu´ e, T.W. H¨ ansch, Frequency comb spectroscopy. Nature Photonics13(3), 146–157 (2019) 16

    2019

  7. [14]

    Coddington, N

    I. Coddington, N. Newbury, W. Swann, Dual-comb spectroscopy. Optica 3(4), 414–426 (2016)

    2016

  8. [15]

    Caldwell, L.C

    E.D. Caldwell, L.C. Sinclair, N.R. Newbury, J.D. Deschenes, The time- programmable frequency comb and its use in quantum-limited ranging. Nature 610(7933), 667–673 (2022)

    2022

  9. [16]

    Takamoto, F.L

    M. Takamoto, F.L. Hong, R. Higashi, H. Katori, An optical lattice clock. Nature 435(7040), 321–324 (2005)

    2005

  10. [17]

    Jiang, C.B

    Z. Jiang, C.B. Huang, D.E. Leaird, A.M. Weiner, Optical arbitrary waveform processing of more than 100 spectral comb lines. Nature Photonics 1(8), 463–467 (2007)

    2007

  11. [18]

    B. Xu, Z. Chen, T.W. H¨ ansch, N. Picqu´ e, Near-ultraviolet photon-counting dual- comb spectroscopy. Nature 627(8003), 289–294 (2024)

    2024

  12. [19]

    Walsh, P

    M. Walsh, P. Chang, F. Emaury, G. Rieker, N. Newbury, F. Giorgetta, S. Did- dams, J. Genest, Mode-resolved, shot noise limited, dual-comb spectroscopy with independent free running lasers, in Fourier Transform Spectroscopy (Optica Publishing Group, 2023), pp. JTh1A–1

    2023

  13. [20]

    Camenzind, B

    S. Camenzind, B. Sierro, B. Willenberg, A. Nussbaum-Lapping, A. Rampur, U. Keller, A. Heidt, C. Phillips, Shot-noise limited dual-comb supercontinuum (2024)

    2024

  14. [21]

    M. Tse, H. Yu, N. Kijbunchoo, A. Fernandez-Galiana, P. Dupej, L. Barsotti, C. Blair, D. Brown, S. Dwyer, A. Effler, et al., Quantum-enhanced advanced ligo detectors in the era of gravitational-wave astronomy. Physical Review Letters 123(23), 231107 (2019)

    2019

  15. [22]

    Y. Xia, W. Li, Q. Zhuang, Z. Zhang, Quantum-enhanced data classification with a variational entangled sensor network. Physical Review X 11(2), 021047 (2021)

    2021

  16. [23]

    Xia, A.R

    Y. Xia, A.R. Agrawal, C.M. Pluchar, A.J. Brady, Z. Liu, Q. Zhuang, D.J. Wilson, Z. Zhang, Entanglement-enhanced optomechanical sensing. Nature Photonics 17(6), 470–477 (2023)

    2023

  17. [24]

    Zhang, S

    Z. Zhang, S. Mouradian, F.N. Wong, J.H. Shapiro, Entanglement-enhanced sens- ing in a lossy and noisy environment. Physical Review Letters 114(11), 110506 (2015)

    2015

  18. [25]

    Belsley, Quantum-enhanced absorption spectroscopy with bright squeezed frequency combs

    A. Belsley, Quantum-enhanced absorption spectroscopy with bright squeezed frequency combs. Physical Review Letters 130(13), 133602 (2023)

    2023

  19. [26]

    H. Shi, Z. Chen, S.E. Fraser, M. Yu, Z. Zhang, Q. Zhuang, Entanglement- enhanced dual-comb spectroscopy. npj Quantum Information 9(1), 91 (2023) 17

    2023

  20. [27]

    Chen, N.C

    M. Chen, N.C. Menicucci, O. Pfister, Experimental realization of multipartite entanglement of 60 modes of a quantum optical frequency comb. Physical Review Letters 112(12), 120505 (2014)

    2014

  21. [28]

    Walls, G

    D. Walls, G. Milburn, Quantum optics 2nd edition. St Lucia, Brisbane QLD 4072 (2011)

    2011

  22. [29]

    Schumaker, Noise in homodyne detection

    B.L. Schumaker, Noise in homodyne detection. Optics Letters 9(5), 189–191 (1984)

    1984

  23. [30]

    Gordon, L.S

    I.E. Gordon, L.S. Rothman, e.R. Hargreaves, R. Hashemi, E.V. Karlovets, F. Skin- ner, E.K. Conway, C. Hill, R.V. Kochanov, Y. Tan, et al., The hitran2020 molecular spectroscopic database. Journal of quantitative spectroscopy and radiative transfer 277, 107949 (2022)

    2022

  24. [31]

    Parriaux, K

    A. Parriaux, K. Hammani, G. Millot, Electro-optic frequency combs. Advances in Optics and Photonics 12(1), 223–287 (2020)

    2020

  25. [32]

    Zhang, M

    Y. Zhang, M. Menotti, K. Tan, V. Vaidya, D. Mahler, L. Helt, L. Zatti, M. Lis- cidini, B. Morrison, Z. Vernon, Squeezed light from a nanophotonic molecule. Nature Communications 12(1), 2233 (2021)

    2021

  26. [33]

    S. Liu, A. Hariri, B.H. Wu, Y. Zhang, Z. Zhang, Generation of Squeezed Light in Silicon Nitride Photonic Integrated Chips, in CLEO: Fundamental Science (Optica Publishing Group, 2024), pp. FF2H–6

    2024

  27. [34]

    Jahanbozorgi, Z

    M. Jahanbozorgi, Z. Yang, S. Sun, H. Chen, R. Liu, B. Wang, X. Yi, Generation of squeezed quantum microcombs with silicon nitride integrated photonic circuits. Optica 10(8), 1100–1101 (2023)

    2023

  28. [35]

    Vahlbruch, M

    H. Vahlbruch, M. Mehmet, K. Danzmann, R. Schnabel, Detection of 15 db squeezed states of light and their application for the absolute calibration of photoelectric quantum efficiency. Physical Review Letters117(11), 110801 (2016)

    2016

  29. [36]

    Lucas, S.P

    E. Lucas, S.P. Yu, T.C. Briles, D.R. Carlson, S.B. Papp, Tailoring micro- combs with inverse-designed, meta-dispersion microresonators. Nature Photonics 17(11), 943–950 (2023)

    2023

  30. [37]

    S.P. Yu, D.C. Cole, H. Jung, G.T. Moille, K. Srinivasan, S.B. Papp, Spontaneous pulse formation in edgeless photonic crystal resonators. Nature Photonics 15(6), 461–467 (2021)

    2021

  31. [38]

    Moreira, S

    R. Moreira, S. Gundavarapu, D.J. Blumenthal, Programmable eye-opener lattice filter for multi-channel dispersion compensation using an integrated compact low- loss silicon nitride platform. Optics Express 24(15), 16732–16742 (2016) 18

    2016

  32. [39]

    A. Dutt, C. Joshi, X. Ji, J. Cardenas, Y. Okawachi, K. Luke, A.L. Gaeta, M. Lip- son, On-chip dual-comb source for spectroscopy. Science Advances4(3), e1701858 (2018)

    2018

  33. [40]

    Millot, S

    G. Millot, S. Pitois, M. Yan, T. Hovhannisyan, A. Bendahmane, T.W. H¨ ansch, N. Picqu´ e, Frequency-agile dual-comb spectroscopy. Nature Photonics 10(1), 27–30 (2016)

    2016

  34. [41]

    Deriushkina, I

    E. Deriushkina, I. Rebolledo-Salgado, M. Mazur, V. Torres-Company, P. Andrek- son, J. Schr¨ oder, M. Karlsson, Dual-comb swept-wavelength interferometry: Theory and experiment. Journal of Lightwave Technology 40(19), 6508–6516 (2022)

    2022

  35. [42]

    Dur´ an, P.A

    V. Dur´ an, P.A. Andrekson, V. Torres-Company, Electro-optic dual-comb inter- ferometry over 40 nm bandwidth. Optics Letters 41(18), 4190–4193 (2016)

    2016

  36. [43]

    Kowligy, D.R

    A.S. Kowligy, D.R. Carlson, D.D. Hickstein, H. Timmers, A.J. Lind, P.G. Schune- mann, S.B. Papp, S.A. Diddams, Mid-infrared frequency combs at 10 ghz. Optics Letters 45(13), 3677–3680 (2020)

    2020

  37. [45]

    M. Yan, Z. Wan, Y. Chen, X. Zhang, H. Zeng, Quantum correlation-enhenced dual-comb spectroscopy. Research Square pp. rs.3.rs–5553447 (2024)

    2024

  38. [46]

    Ralph, Can signal-to-noise be improved by heterodyne detection using an amplitude squeezed local oscillator? Physical Review Letters 85(3), 677 (2000) 19

    T. Ralph, Can signal-to-noise be improved by heterodyne detection using an amplitude squeezed local oscillator? Physical Review Letters 85(3), 677 (2000) 19

    2000

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.